University of Athens ‘Plato’s Academy’ Conference 12-16 December 2012 Georgia Tsouni (Bern) [email protected] Re-inventing an old tradition: the ‘Old Academy’ of Antiochus of Ascalon 1. Antiochus at the Ruins of the Academy In one of the most evocative introductions to his dialogues, in the last book of De Finibus1, Cicero describes how he and his interlocutors, his brother Quintus, Marcus Piso, T. Pomponius Atticus and Cicero’s cousin Lucius visit the spot of Plato’s Academy, while on a grand educational tour to the Greek world in 79 BC; in stark contrast to the gloomy reality resulting from the Roman siege of the city, which had led to the closure of the philosophical schools (as a consequence of Athens’ involvement in the Mithridatic War), Athens appears there as an idealised space, the birthplace of the greatest politicians, poets, rhetoricians and philosophers, whose scenes of action (although deserted) offer a reminiscence of glory and inspiration for the Roman youth: Phalerum brings to mind the great rhetorician Demosthenes, whereas the, by that time, deserted Academy, makes one remember Cicero’s favourite, Carneades, and the legendary debates he held on that spot many decades before2. As Cicero puts it: Multa in omni parte Athenarum sunt in ipsis locis indicia summorum virorum Cicero, Fin. 5.5 In every quarter of Athens the mere sites contain many mementoes of the most illustrious men. Athens thus appears at the beginning of the first century BC to be on the map as an educational destination, but more as a ‘landscape of memory’, rather than of original intellectual production. The return to the past illustrated by Cicero in the preface to the last book of his De Finibus becomes more suggestive, if we consider that the book is dedicated to the exposition of the ethical theory of Antiochus. The latter was teaching at the 1 Fin. 5.1-5. 2 Fin. 5.4. 1 University of Athens ‘Plato’s Academy’ Conference 12-16 December 2012 Georgia Tsouni (Bern) [email protected] Ptolemaum, another gymnasium of Athens, at the time when Cicero visited the city with his companions in 79 BC3. Antiochus is presented as the most important teacher of philosophy at Cicero’s time4; even he, however, is looking back to the past, matching the attitude of Cicero and his companions. His ‘Old Academy’, claimed to represent the ancient tradition, for which Athens was becoming so popular among the Roman elite, and not a new direction of thought. Thus, what was ‘new’ about Antiochus was precisely that he was looking backwards: he was the first philosopher to break the institutional continuity of Plato’s school by challenging the authority of its last scholarch, Philo of Larissa, and attempting a resurrection of an earlier tradition from which his predecessors were considered to have diverted. The testimonies, as the following one from Sextus’ Outlines of Pyrrhonism, refer to this movement as a ‘fifth Academy’ following the ‘Middle Academy’ of Arcesilaus, the ‘New Academy’ of Carneades and the controversial fourth Academy of Philo: Ἀκαδηµίαι δὲ γεγόνασιν, ὡς φασὶ<ν οἱ> πλείους [ἢ], τρεῖς, µία µὲν καὶ ἀρχαιοτάτη ἡ τῶν περὶ Πλάτωνα, δευτέρα δὲ καὶ µέση ἡ τῶν περὶ Ἀρκεσίλαον τὸν ἀκουστὴν Πολέµωνος, τρίτη δὲ καὶ νέα ἡ τῶν περὶ Καρνεάδην καὶ Κλειτόµαχον· ἔνιοι δὲ καὶ τετάρτην προστιθέασι τὴν περὶ Φίλωνα καὶ Χαρµίδαν, τινὲς δὲ καὶ πέµπτην καταλέγουσι τὴν περὶ [τὸν] Ἀντίοχον. S.E. PH 1.220 According to most people there have been three Academies⎯ the first and most ancient that of Plato and his school, the second or middle Academy that of Arcesilaus, the pupil of Polemo, and his School, the third or New Academy that of the school of Carneades and Cleitomachus. Some, however, add as a fourth that of the school of Philo and Charmidas; and some even count the School of Antiochus as a fifth. The main rationale for Antiochus’ move, and the reason why he is listed in Sextus as initiating a new phase of Academic history, was that the school since the Academic Sceptics took over had taken a false direction: contrary to the claims of Philo and his predecessors reaching down to Arcesilaus (who took over the school in 270 BC), the ‘real’ Academy, according to Antiochus, did not renounce the possibility of knowledge and thus 3 Fin. 5.1. 4 Cf. Luc. 113. 2 University of Athens ‘Plato’s Academy’ Conference 12-16 December 2012 Georgia Tsouni (Bern) [email protected] was not committed merely to sceptical enquiry, as Arcesilaus and his followers using the example of Socratic practice advocated. The sceptical Academy had undergone significant changes as well: Arcesilaus, the first scholarch after the school’s sceptical turn, had denied the possibility of knowledge altogether. Carneades advocated a soft form of scepticism, probabilism, which allowed extensive argument in favour of particular positions, which were judged according to their persuasive power. Philo, at least in the theses he formulated while in Rome, conceded that some kind of knowledge (katalēpsis) was possible5 but he refused that one needed, or could formulate, a criterion for it; the description of the Sosus episode in Cicero’s Lucullus suggests that for this position Philo sought Platonic authority, proposing perhaps a new reading of Plato along such lines6. For Antiochus this was not a defensible (or even coherent) position and thus, once there was no real institutional commitment between him and Philo, seized the opportunity and advocated a dogmatic theory, which he now presented as the true Academic tradition⎯ and a viable way to defend katalēpsis. The fact that this revival movement took place away from Athens, when Antiochus sought to escape the imminent Roman siege of the city7, is indicative of the quest for new orientations on the part of Greek-speaking intellectuals during this era, and the ensuing ‘decentralisation’ of philosophical activity away from its birthplace8. In search for a new role, Antiochus went into the service of the Roman general Lucullus9, as an advisor and perhaps mediator for the contacts of his Roman patron with the Greek-speaking local 5 Our most important testimony is S.E. PH 1.235: Οἱ δὲ περὶ Φίλωνά φασιν ὅσον µὲν ἐπὶ τῷ Στωικῷ κριτηρίῳ, τουτέστι τῇ καταληπτικῇ φαντασίᾳ, ἀκατάληπτα εἶναι τὰ πράγµατα, ὅσον δὲ ἐπὶ τῇ φύσει τῶν πραγµάτων αὐτῶν, καταληπτά. 6 Cf. Tarrant (1985:44). 7 Antiochus’ reaction to the ‘Roman books’ of Philo, as presented in Cicero’s Lucullus, may plausibly be regarded as the first expression of Antiochus’ new orientation. By contrast, Glucker (1978:20) suggests that Antiochus expressed his dissident views already at the beginning of the 90s BC, while a member of Philo’s school. 8 D. Sedley (2003:31) refers to this as the ‘epoch-making change that philosophy underwent in the 1st century BC’. Another case of a philosopher who moved to Rome during this period is the Epicurean Philodemus, see Sedley (2003:35). Panaetius in the previous generation had already created strong bonds with the Scipios (s. Cic. Luc. 5), which were sustained through frequent visits to Rome. 9 S. Luc. 4: eum (sc. Antiochum) secum et quaestor habuit (sc. Lucullus) et post aliquot annos imperator. 3 University of Athens ‘Plato’s Academy’ Conference 12-16 December 2012 Georgia Tsouni (Bern) [email protected] communities in the East10. It is from Alexandria in 87 BC, following Lucullus11, that he responds to Philo’s so-called Roman books12 and, through a treatise entitled Sosus13, for the first time openly challenges the Academic identity as represented by its institutional head. Assuming that the promotion of the ancient tradition took place after Antiochus was already in the service of Lucullus, and had acquired a name in the Roman elite, the importance assigned to the ancestry of his views in Cicero gains in significance. The auctoritas of the ancients14 had considerable value in a society, which presented the ‘customs of the forefathers’ (mores maiorum)15 and their exempla as a constant point of validation; the notion of auctoritas itself had particular political connotations and associations with the power of the Senate (and thus not surprisingly Cicero is keen to use it in passages which bear the influence of Antiochus)16. Moreover, Greek paideia (including philosophy as an essential tool) was becoming important symbolic capital and sign of power and influence, serving the Ciceronian ideal of humanitas, of the cultivated citizen of the republic. This was, after all, an important reason why Cicero undertook the writing of philosophical treatises and the huge task of translating and introducing Greek philosophy to Rome in the first place. The Antiochean spokesman again in the preface to De Finibus is eager to underline the educational role of his movement in the service of the training of the aspiring Roman political elite; the whole speech has a didactic character addressed to the young cousin of Cicero, Lucius. In this respect, it is suggestive that Antiochus underlines 10 Plutarch in his Life of Lucullus (42.3) refers to the philosopher as his ‘friend and companion’ (φίλον… καὶ συµβιωτὴν ). According to the testimony of Cicero (Luc. 61), Antiochus died in the company of Lucullus during a campaign in Syria. The evidence from Philodemus’ Index Academicorum, col. 34 (s. Brink 2007:89) also states that Antiochus spent most of his life in Rome and the eastern provinces in the service of generals and died in Mesopotamia following Lucullus. For the role of Greek-speaking intellectuals as advisors to the Roman elite, see Glucker (1978:24) and Crawford (1978:203). 11 Luc. 11. 12 In Acad. 11, we find the reference to two books of Philo, who reached Antiochus in Alexandria.